|
Presumably they are refillable.
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 06:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 01:48 |
|
|
DNova posted:Presumably they are refillable. Naw, didn't you know that F-18s are single use items? Why else would aircraft carriers need to be so big?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 10:36
|
|
|
CBJSprague24 posted:Interesting. I've only seen about 10 minutes of it so far. Got any stories worth sharing? Do/did you know much about the F/E? I got a laugh out of his "What am I supposed to do now?" pause at the end of the walkaround. I'll have to see if I can find a copy of it. I haven't seen the full video in several years, and the segment that's on YouTube never shows the F/E. Or the tail number. I'd probably have better stories about the particular tail than I would about the flight crew.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 15:02
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:I'll have to see if I can find a copy of it. I haven't seen the full video in several years, and the segment that's on YouTube never shows the F/E. It's N606GC and I think the captain in the right seat introduced the F/E as Steve Smith.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 15:39
|
|
|
Well - I am going to try to earn the 'Captain' in my username. After all the recent Civil Air Patrol posts, I decided I would look into and see how I could benefit the next generation of aviators. There are THREE squadrons in my town, and each website says they are in desperate need of pilots. Two squadrons have cadets, and another squadron is for 'senior members only.' I am not much into military marching orders, but I am into providing youth and opportunity to grope the gently caress out of airplanes and encourage people. I'm sure I'll get jaded and quit within a month, but I think it may be beneficial to some others. Who wants to place bets on how much this will be a complete cluster gently caress? For posterity, my main goals are to encourage others to pursue general aviation (and beyond) and help motivate others by being a positive aviation role model. (internet persona not withstanding)
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 17:07
|
|
|
Captain Apollo posted:Well - I am going to try to earn the 'Captain' in my username. Do you have to buy into the whole situation? I went to a CAP ... uh, meeting? once with my friend when I was maybe 12. It was really dumb and when I pressed them for information about actually flying airplanes they had basically nothing to tell me. I didn't go back. If you can just show up and be the cool guy with an airplane and some intro lessons then I think it would be a blast. If you have to wear a uniform and be all yes sir no sir then lol.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 17:15
|
|
|
I want to be the guy that actually knows ANYTHING about the airplanes. On paper it seems like I could be a good fit. I don't have shiny jet syndrome. I love flying piston singles. I have the ratings and the certificates to be able to give flight lessons and help out deserving students. Again, internet persona not withstanding, my favorite part of flying is being a Flight Instructor. It is my ultimate satisfaction, so hopefully I can find some youth to help encourage....\ But - let's just say my grooming standards are more like FerretKings as opposed to the avatar on the left 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 17:30
|
|
|
And the CAP discussion a few pages back didn't dissuade you?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 20:10
|
|
|
Captain Apollo posted:I want to be the guy that actually knows ANYTHING about the airplanes. On paper it seems like I could be a good fit. If you want to wear the uniform you'll have to trim. Also you might be too fat to meet the dress code. Polo and khakis for you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 21:04
|
|
|
fordan posted:And the CAP discussion a few pages back didn't dissuade you? If nothing else, it'll make for a good story and for good reading. Let's see how bad it is on the "pilot" side. I'll visit 3 different squadrons and see which is the best, if any.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 21:08
|
|
|
Captain Apollo posted:I decided I would look into and see how I could benefit the next generation of aviators. Please do evaluate the org for yourself, there are good and bad people depending mostly on where you happen to be. One of the blended squadrons would probably be best if you want to help out the younger folks, though it often seems like the planes don't get distributed that way. Find out for sure, see if it agrees with you. If, for whatever reason, it doesn't officially work out: I'll mention that my EAA chapter did young eagles flights for the CAP kids on some pre-arranged days. If the kids don't normally get to go to the aircraft, that might be a way to establish a relationship with the younger folks without having to deal with the military structure yourself.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 21:30
|
|
|
Captain Apollo posted:Well - I am going to try to earn the 'Captain' in my username. I can't remember what the hell saw me hanging out with a CAP squadron or whatever they call them during my Associate's, but I remember myself and a couple classmates helping out with their flight planning exercise one night after our class had ended. I didn't care much for the "Pretend Air Force" stuff like uniforms or the marching/formations (e- but I don't care for that in general. I've seen adults at Yacht Clubs get giddy over that poo poo), but the program itself seemed worthwhile enough. Another option you could do if CAP doesn't work out (or even if it does) is to find local/nearby Boy Scout Troops in need of an Aviation merit badge. I've posted about the "events" I put together for first my dad's Troop and later another local group (my walkaround, local CFI's 172 rides, my dad letting them briefly dick around with FS2004 being the three stations). The first group of kids were really into it and it was ridiculously personally rewarding. My pilot mill also did educational stuff before the Dayton Air Show in 2005 at a kid's day-type thing and god drat did it rule showing those kids around the 152 we'd dragged up the street to the expo center and let them poke around inside. They ate it up. 
CBJSprague24 fucked around with this message at 21:58 on Jul 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 21:53
|
|
|
That's a really great idea. Before I moved I was the EAA Young Eagles Co-Chair. I recently signed back up to be involved in my new location. I will also strongly consider helping for the boy scouts.... I am NOT interested in military gunghoness. As we all know I generally hate being told what to do if it doesn't make sense. We'll see how long I last. Surely there is some levelheaded squadron out there that exists, right?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 22:09
|
|
|
I have to say, doing all this survey work has made me really complacent with NOTAMs. I can't remember the last time I went out of my way to look one up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 22:30
|
|
|
Last week LIDO gave us a nice 71 page flight plan. 45 pages of NOTAMs 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
Apollo's Airplane Ownership Tip of the Month: Part of any airplane rental price is the hourly consumption of oil in the airplane. If you're renting an airplane, you should have unfettered access to bottles or cases of oil so you can keep the airplane at a happy level. For each engine (even of the same type) this can vary slightly. It seems like Cherokee 180 likes to stay around 5.5 while my Mooney M20C like to stay right above 6. There are maximums and minimums associated with each. For the Lycoming 360 that's in both airplanes, 8 is the maximum and 2 is the drop dead minimum. Each flight school will have its own guidelines for where they keep their engine oil level. Some schools will dictate that you can't start the engine below X, and some will dictate you can land with oil below X. It's all a matter of ownership preference and experience. As an airplane owner, however, you are saddled with trying to find your oil level consumption and where the oil level likes to be by default all by yourself. Sometimes you go a month without flying, and sometimes you fly three times a week. It can be hard to know where your oil level likes to be in your single. My particular engine has been using W100 almost since it's inception. As a matter of continuation I am continuing with that oil. I have no feelings one way or the other on engine oils as I am not mechanically intelligent enough to know which snake oil I am consuming and which one I am avoiding. W100 is sometimes a little more pricey than most. I recently went down to the local aviation supply shop and bought a case of W100 for nearly 90 dollars. A reasonable price considering it was at the airport and close to my airplane when I needed to go fly. However, I remembered when I was doing my PPL training that my CFI took me to a local oil distribution company. This 'Oil Warehouse' of sorts was servicing major companies who needed oil and its related products. I didn't really think much of it at the time because Oil is Oil, but as you become an Airplane Owner it seems odd to pay more money for things which are already expensive. So - I checked around for lower prices for my oil. As a natural internet consumer, I went to Sportys and Aircraft Spruce (amazon had nothing). They have list prices around 77 dollars, but include 15 bucks of shipping. But I googled 'City Name Oil Distributor' and found several options in my town. I found the company that was the Aeroshell distributor and walked away with 2 cases that were $67 a piece (including tax). Shop around and save yourself money.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 20:55
|
|
|
I had no idea there was a particular oil level that the engine "likes"... what exactly does that mean and how do you figure it out?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 06:27
|
|
|
DNova posted:I had no idea there was a particular oil level that the engine "likes"... what exactly does that mean and how do you figure it out? It'll be in the aircraft's manual. Here's a page from a DA20-C1's AFM (after a page listing approved oil brands/types): 
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 06:50
|
|
|
Well, that I know, but it sounded like Apollo is implying there is a "sweet spot" within the range of acceptable fill levels for your engine. I have an O-300 and I've just been adding a quart when it's at 6. edit: I've been doing a little bit of reading and it seems like people get less oil consumption on the O-300 by keeping it at 5-6 quarts, which means I might be keeping mine too full. I am using a lot of oil, too. sleepy gary fucked around with this message at 06:56 on Jul 31, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 06:52
|
|
|
So as you've probably read by now, the maximum oil quantity doesn't really help out any. In reality, and something you will notice if you clean the underbelly of the airplane and then watch the oil accumulation after several hours, is that most of the oil will 'blow out' of the engine if it's too full. Really the engine only needs 2 quarts (or so I hear I haven't actually done this, although I do think Slaughter had a scare a couple years ago) to keep parts lubricated. Best guess on how well the engine temps and oil pressure will do with that little oil. Looking at Lycoming specs, you can extrapolate that oil 'consumption' of more than a quart per two hours generally is a bad sign to the operator. So you have to balance your needs for oil pressure and oil temperature with the amount of oil the airplane engine can actually hold without blowing it out all over the bottom of the fuselage, and balance it with how much the engine will normally (and it should) 'eat.' I was beginning to think my effort post was really dumb, I was about to go back to starting arguments on the F-16 and Cessna crash. Maybe I'll turn a new leaf? (ATC hosed up big time and killed the cessna pilot)
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 07:01
|
|
|
The same principle works on turbines, it seems. The CF34-10E appears to just chuck out the back anything above a certain oil level. Naturally, head office has decided that the appropriate daily fill level is one quart above that level...
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 09:15
|
|
|
DNova posted:Well, that I know, but it sounded like Apollo is implying there is a "sweet spot" within the range of acceptable fill levels for your engine. I have an O-300 and I've just been adding a quart when it's at 6. The Cessna 150 spits out anything above 5-5.5 quarts (max 6). It has a vent at the top of the crank case that allows sloshed oil to exit, so if it's too full it'll just spit out a quart.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 11:52
|
|
|
Something interesting from that Allegiant fuel emergency in Fargo.quote:http://pastie.org/10322063
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 12:55
|
|
|
Serious question for the corporate guys: what would be the odds of me pulling a part 91 Learjet job (right seat) with about 800 total time and a pic type rating in the aircraft. I obviously wouldn't have my ATP. I work for a training facility (not going into too much details) that is going to be giving me a type rating soon as a bonus. Problem is my schedule has been so inconsistent and unreliable here for the last few months that I haven't been able to schedule any flying at my CFI job to build time. It's starting to wear on me, and I don't make enough at this one job to be financially comfortable. I'm just exploring options.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 18:44
|
|
|
I was phone-posting the other day about the Just Planes DVDs and couldn't provide a link. The Boeing sale starts today: http://www.worldairroutes.com/sale.html
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 21:30
|
|
|
Rolo posted:Serious question for the corporate guys: what would be the odds of me pulling a part 91 Learjet job (right seat) with about 800 total time and a pic type rating in the aircraft. Depending on how willing you are to travel I'd say pretty good. I know guys that got hired with less and didn't have a type
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2015 02:13
|
|
|
Stupid Post Maker posted:Depending on how willing you are to travel I'd say pretty good. I know guys that got hired with less and didn't have a type Nice! I am willing to travel as long as it's in the 3 states I like (joke.) I've just cracked my logbook open and realized I flew 7 total hour in July because of how unreliable my scheduling is.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2015 21:36
|
|
|
Buddy messages me: "You gotta see this." http://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=178202 I click the link. Okay, it's an incident from two days ago, aircraft type... Ekranoplan? What.  (No fatalities or major injuries, has video of the crash).
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2015 04:21
|
|
|
Holy poo poo, never heard of these until now. Spent an hour watching very large planes skim the water and loved every minute.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2015 05:09
|
|
|
JnnyThndrs posted:Holy poo poo, never heard of these until now. Spent an hour watching very large planes skim the water and loved every minute. Ekranoplans are the best. The big scary Cold War ones also have the best nickname, "the Caspian Sea Monster".
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2015 05:46
|
|
|
What about aircraft engines makes them consume oil so fast? I know their ignition system is greatly simplified, and they typically run a higher compression but when you compare it to a car engine where you might see one quart of oil consumption per year on a well maintained engine. One quart per 6 hours seems excessive. I realize prop engines haven't changed significantly in probably 50 years but half a quart an hour in a 4 stroke engine is kind of mind blowing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2015 06:11
|
|
|
Hadlock posted:What about aircraft engines makes them consume oil so fast? I know their ignition system is greatly simplified, and they typically run a higher compression but when you compare it to a car engine where you might see one quart of oil consumption per year on a well maintained engine. One quart per 6 hours seems excessive. I realize prop engines haven't changed significantly in probably 50 years but half a quart an hour in a 4 stroke engine is kind of mind blowing. Air cooled engines typically have slightly larger piston/bore clearances in general, and aircraft engines tend to have even bigger clearances than car engines. The biggest factor is honestly just fifty years of engine development. Aircraft piston engines from Lycoming and Continental are almost universally using ring packages that were originally designed when there was a Kennedy in the White House.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2015 11:09
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:Air cooled engines typically have slightly larger piston/bore clearances in general, and aircraft engines tend to have even bigger clearances than car engines. The biggest factor is honestly just fifty years of engine development. Aircraft piston engines from Lycoming and Continental are almost universally using ring packages that were originally designed when there was a Kennedy in the White House. Yep. Development and certification of aircraft anything is expensive, and why bother with a long and painful process when you already have something that works.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2015 16:46
|
|
|
A buddy of mine called me to tell me he had gasoline put in his engine instead of diesel. I though oh my god man are you okay and how much is it going to cost to overhaul??? He said he just called Triple A and got towed....  Then he said the overhaul was only going to cost 5 grand tops ..... He was talking about his diesel pickup truck. drat insurance and lawyers for making our engines so drat expensive to overhaul.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2015 00:47
|
|
|
I was wondering why aviation engines are so bad. Someone told me that they need avgas and so much oil because they run at high RPMs, but I watched my Honda's RPM while I was cruising at 75 on the interstate and it ran at similar RPMs to the Cessna 172 I fly. Needs an oil change every 2 years, runs on regular gas, probably doesn't even weigh more than the 172's engine and has a higher horsepower. And it'll run till the heat death of the universe with no maintenance whatsoever. Is there an actual *good* reason we can't put car engines in airplanes?
Hauldren Collider fucked around with this message at 01:03 on Aug 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2015 01:01
|
|
|
gently caress car engines. I want a suzuki motorcycle engine from the mid 80s. TANKS. except for gears. geared airplane engines are supposedly terrible ( i have no experience with one, even after Flying a Cessna 175 for years...)
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2015 01:07
|
|
|
Captain Apollo posted:A buddy of mine called me to tell me he had gasoline put in his engine instead of diesel. Truck/Auto mechanic here: 95% of the time you can just drain the whole fuel system and refill w/diesel and everything is hunky-dory. The flaming dipshits who's fleet I support do this all_the_damn_time. The only time it really screws things up is when someone tops off a 3/4 full tank and drives it a long distance under a load even though it's running terribly - when it's near-empty and you gas up a diesel, it usually just sputters and dies after a short time, which generally means no permanent damage.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2015 01:52
|
|
|
Hauldren Collider posted:I was wondering why aviation engines are so bad. Someone told me that they need avgas and so much oil because they run at high RPMs, but I watched my Honda's RPM while I was cruising at 75 on the interstate and it ran at similar RPMs to the Cessna 172 I fly. Needs an oil change every 2 years, runs on regular gas, probably doesn't even weigh more than the 172's engine and has a higher horsepower. And it'll run till the heat death of the universe with no maintenance whatsoever. Is there an actual *good* reason we can't put car engines in airplanes? A fair number of people put Subaru engines in experimentals. Many  here: http://www.vansairforce.com/community/forumdisplay.php?f=22Ps. By default vaf doesn't display posts older than month. Change it at the bottom toolbar. CBJamo fucked around with this message at 02:34 on Aug 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2015 02:26
|
|
|
Hauldren Collider posted:I was wondering why aviation engines are so bad. Someone told me that they need avgas and so much oil because they run at high RPMs, but I watched my Honda's RPM while I was cruising at 75 on the interstate and it ran at similar RPMs to the Cessna 172 I fly. Needs an oil change every 2 years, runs on regular gas, probably doesn't even weigh more than the 172's engine and has a higher horsepower. And it'll run till the heat death of the universe with no maintenance whatsoever. Is there an actual *good* reason we can't put car engines in airplanes? It's been tried before (Mooney used Porsche engines in 1988, but Porsce backed out of the program shortly thereafter), but most of the reasons come down to what the respective engines are designed to do. Car engines are generally designed to put out a higher amount of horsepower for a short time, then settle into a much lower power output (and RPM) for any kind of sustained operations. Aircraft engines are designed to run at full power for relatively long periods of time, followed by cruise settings at 65-75% power, all while turning at RPM's that are close to their redline, and they'll usually do so reliably for somewhere near 2000 hours. Since car engines aren't designed with that kind of sustained, high power operations in mind, getting them to exhibit the kind of reliability that is expected from a certified aircraft engine is difficult (and expensive), to say nothing of the added complexity and weight of a reduction gearbox and a liquid cooling system. That said, there have been cases of auto engines (air cooled VW units, Subaru's 4-cylinder boxer, and Corvair engines) being used successfully in homebuilt airplanes for a number of years, but in most cases the cost and time (not to mention liability) of getting something new certified for use in a production aircraft makes it completely unattractive for engine or aircraft manufacturers. azflyboy fucked around with this message at 02:35 on Aug 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2015 02:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 01:48 |
|
|
azflyboy posted:It's been tried before (Mooney used Porsche engines in 1988, but Porsce backed out of the program shortly thereafter), but most of the reasons come down to what the respective engines are designed to do. quote:the cost and time (not to mention liability) of getting something new certified for use in a production aircraft makes it completely unattractive for engine or aircraft manufacturers. EDIT: To clarify, I believe all the things you said about the difference in design, I just don't believe that it would be much of a factor considering how much more modern car engines are these days. Hauldren Collider fucked around with this message at 02:45 on Aug 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2015 02:41
|
|